The Year of Voter Suppression

Claren Merritt, 3, looks up at her father Andy Merritt as he casts his ballot in Atlanta, on election day, Tuesday, Nov. 3, 2009. (Photo: Erik Lesser/The New York Times)

As we enter another election cycle, our most urgent challenge will be to ensure that the right to vote and the right to have that vote counted is protected. It comes as no surprise that this “basic right, without which all others are meaningless” has come under massive attack as we prepare to re-elect the first Black POTUS, who was swept into office by voters of color, youth and women.

Voter suppression efforts take a variety of forms. Certainly there are the blatant efforts to legislatively restrict access to the franchise via legal barriers such as recent changes that require voter identification and documentation of citizenship, limit early and absentee voting, make voter registration more difficult and further restrict the voting rights of former felons. These tactics are favored by the right, and disproportionately impact communities of color particularly African Americans, Latino/as and American Indians. Recent research of felony disenfranchisement alone, for example, indicates thatfelony disenfranchisement and the over-representation by race has already and will continue to impact the outcome of both national and state-level elections. In all cases, Republicans benefit.

This is what we are up against in 2012. And up against it in an election cycle that will be — courtesy of the SCOTUS and Citizens United v Federal Election Commission (2010) – awash in unlimited, unprecedented gushers of corporate money.

As the year progresses, CI will continue to detail these disenfranchisement efforts and offer action options towards resistance and successful GOTV. For now, here is a brief over-view of the current landscape.

These new restrictions fall most heavily on young, minority, and low-income voters, as well as on voters with disabilities. This wave of changes may sharply tilt the political terrain for the 2012 election. Based on the Brennan Center’s analysis of the 19 laws and two executive actions that passed in 14 states, it is clear that:

~ These new laws could make it significantly harder for more than five million eligible voters to cast ballots in 2012.

~ The states that have already cut back on voting rights will provide 171 electoral votes in 2012 – 63 percent of the 270 needed to win the presidency.

~ Of the 12 likely battleground states, as assessed by an August Los Angeles Times analysis of Gallup polling, five have already cut back on voting rights (and may pass additional restrictive legislation), and two more are currently considering new restrictions.

States have changed their laws so rapidly that no single analysis has assessed the overall impact of such moves. Although it is too early to quantify how the changes will impact voter turnout, they will be a hindrance to many voters at a time when the United States continues to turn out less than two thirds of its eligible citizens in presidential elections and less than half in midterm elections.

”You start out in 1954 by saying, ‘N#$%*r, n#$%*r, n#$%*r.’ By 1968 you can’t say ‘n#$%*r’ — that hurts you. Backfires. So you say stuff like forced busing, states’ rights and all that stuff. You’re getting so abstract now [that] you’re talking about cutting taxes, and all these things you’re talking about are totally economic things and a byproduct of them is [that] blacks get hurt worse than whites.

”And subconsciously maybe that is part of it. I’m not saying that. But I’m saying that if it is getting that abstract, and that coded, that we are doing away with the racial problem one way or the other. You follow me — because obviously sitting around saying, ‘We want to cut this,’ is much more abstract than even the busing thing, and a hell of a lot more abstract than ‘N#$%*r, n#$%*r.”’

Of course, the appeals to racial hysteria are only magnified when the target is the first Black POTUS. And all right wing the madness of the past four years and the madness yet to come is about race — from You lie!” to birthers to a tea-party gone woefully wrong, to this recent Fox news question – ” How long do you think Sean Hannity’s show would last if four times in one sentence, he made a comment about, say, the President of the United States, and said that he looked like a skinny, ghetto crackhead? Which, by the way, you might want to say that Barack Obama does.”

Nancy A. Heitzeg, Ph.D is a professor of sociology and director of the critical studies of race/ethnicity program at St. Catherine University. She is the author of The School to Prison Pipeline: Education, Discipline, and Double Standards (Praeger, 2015), and has written/presented widely on issues of race, class, gender and social control with particular attention to color-blind racism, the prison-industrial complex and the school-to-prison pipeline. She is, with Kay Whitlock, co-founder and co-editor of the Criminal Injustice series on the Critical Mass Progress blog.

The Year of Voter Suppression

Claren Merritt, 3, looks up at her father Andy Merritt as he casts his ballot in Atlanta, on election day, Tuesday, Nov. 3, 2009. (Photo: Erik Lesser/The New York Times)

As we enter another election cycle, our most urgent challenge will be to ensure that the right to vote and the right to have that vote counted is protected. It comes as no surprise that this “basic right, without which all others are meaningless” has come under massive attack as we prepare to re-elect the first Black POTUS, who was swept into office by voters of color, youth and women.

Voter suppression efforts take a variety of forms. Certainly there are the blatant efforts to legislatively restrict access to the franchise via legal barriers such as recent changes that require voter identification and documentation of citizenship, limit early and absentee voting, make voter registration more difficult and further restrict the voting rights of former felons. These tactics are favored by the right, and disproportionately impact communities of color particularly African Americans, Latino/as and American Indians. Recent research of felony disenfranchisement alone, for example, indicates thatfelony disenfranchisement and the over-representation by race has already and will continue to impact the outcome of both national and state-level elections. In all cases, Republicans benefit.

This is what we are up against in 2012. And up against it in an election cycle that will be — courtesy of the SCOTUS and Citizens United v Federal Election Commission (2010) – awash in unlimited, unprecedented gushers of corporate money.

As the year progresses, CI will continue to detail these disenfranchisement efforts and offer action options towards resistance and successful GOTV. For now, here is a brief over-view of the current landscape.

These new restrictions fall most heavily on young, minority, and low-income voters, as well as on voters with disabilities. This wave of changes may sharply tilt the political terrain for the 2012 election. Based on the Brennan Center’s analysis of the 19 laws and two executive actions that passed in 14 states, it is clear that:

~ These new laws could make it significantly harder for more than five million eligible voters to cast ballots in 2012.

~ The states that have already cut back on voting rights will provide 171 electoral votes in 2012 – 63 percent of the 270 needed to win the presidency.

~ Of the 12 likely battleground states, as assessed by an August Los Angeles Times analysis of Gallup polling, five have already cut back on voting rights (and may pass additional restrictive legislation), and two more are currently considering new restrictions.

States have changed their laws so rapidly that no single analysis has assessed the overall impact of such moves. Although it is too early to quantify how the changes will impact voter turnout, they will be a hindrance to many voters at a time when the United States continues to turn out less than two thirds of its eligible citizens in presidential elections and less than half in midterm elections.

”You start out in 1954 by saying, ‘N#$%*r, n#$%*r, n#$%*r.’ By 1968 you can’t say ‘n#$%*r’ — that hurts you. Backfires. So you say stuff like forced busing, states’ rights and all that stuff. You’re getting so abstract now [that] you’re talking about cutting taxes, and all these things you’re talking about are totally economic things and a byproduct of them is [that] blacks get hurt worse than whites.

”And subconsciously maybe that is part of it. I’m not saying that. But I’m saying that if it is getting that abstract, and that coded, that we are doing away with the racial problem one way or the other. You follow me — because obviously sitting around saying, ‘We want to cut this,’ is much more abstract than even the busing thing, and a hell of a lot more abstract than ‘N#$%*r, n#$%*r.”’

Of course, the appeals to racial hysteria are only magnified when the target is the first Black POTUS. And all right wing the madness of the past four years and the madness yet to come is about race — from You lie!” to birthers to a tea-party gone woefully wrong, to this recent Fox news question – ” How long do you think Sean Hannity’s show would last if four times in one sentence, he made a comment about, say, the President of the United States, and said that he looked like a skinny, ghetto crackhead? Which, by the way, you might want to say that Barack Obama does.”

Nancy A. Heitzeg, Ph.D is a professor of sociology and director of the critical studies of race/ethnicity program at St. Catherine University. She is the author of The School to Prison Pipeline: Education, Discipline, and Double Standards (Praeger, 2015), and has written/presented widely on issues of race, class, gender and social control with particular attention to color-blind racism, the prison-industrial complex and the school-to-prison pipeline. She is, with Kay Whitlock, co-founder and co-editor of the Criminal Injustice series on the Critical Mass Progress blog.